/*

David Pedulla
Proposal title: Opting into Work-Family Policies: Comparing the Effects of Material and Cultural Concerns

HYPOTHESES

Stated-Hyp 1: Women, on average, will be more likely to use supportive work-family policies than men.

	Test-Hyp 1: Women, on average, will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men.

	Test-Hyp 2: Women, on average, will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men.

Stated-Hyp 2: As the material component of work-family policies improves, both men and women will be more likely to utilize the policies, but the effect will be stronger for men.
	
	Test-Hyp 3: Men in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the half paid leave condition.

	Test-Hyp 4: Women in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the half paid leave condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 5: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.

	Test-Hyp 6: Men in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the unpaid leave condition.

	Test-Hyp 7: Women in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the unpaid leave condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 8: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	
	Test-Hyp 9: Men in the half paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the unpaid leave condition.

	Test-Hyp 10: Women in the half paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the unpaid leave condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 11: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	
	Test-Hyp 12: Men in the flexible work condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the reduced work condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 13: Women in the flexible work condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the reduced work condition.	
	
	Test-Hyp 14: The effect of the flexible work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.

Stated-Hyp 3: As the cultural acceptance of work-family policies increases, both men and women will be more likely to utilize them. Again, these effects will be stronger for men.

	Test-Hyp 15: Men in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the uncommon usage condition.

	Test-Hyp 16: Women in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the uncommon usage condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 17: The effect of the common usage (vs uncommon usage) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	
	Test-Hyp 18: Men in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the promotion unlikely condition.

	Test-Hyp 19: Women in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the promotion unlikely condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 20: The effect of the promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	
	Test-Hyp 21: Men in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the uncommon usage condition.

	Test-Hyp 22: Women in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the uncommon usage condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 23: The effect of the common usage (vs uncommon usage) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.
	
	Test-Hyp 24: Men in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the promotion unlikely condition.

	Test-Hyp 25: Women in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the promotion unlikely condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 26: The effect of the promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.

Stated-Hyp 4: The positive association between material support and policy use will be stronger when the cultural environment is also supportive of using work-family policies.

	Test-Hyp 27: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 28: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.

	Test-Hyp 29: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.

	Test-Hyp 30: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.
	
	Test-Hyp 31: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.

	Test-Hyp 32: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.

	Test-Hyp 33: The effect of the flexibe work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.

	Test-Hyp 34: The effect of the flexibe work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.

Stated-Hyp 5: The interactive effect of these material and cultural dimensions will be stronger for men than women.

	Test-Hyp 35: The full paid leave (vs half paid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	
	Test-Hyp 36: The full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).

	Test-Hyp 37: The half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).

	Test-Hyp 38: The full paid leave (vs half paid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	
	Test-Hyp 39: The full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).

	Test-Hyp 40: The half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).

	Test-Hyp 41: The flexibe work (vs reduced work) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men (vs women).

	Test-Hyp 42: The flexibe work (vs reduced work) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men (vs women).
	
********************************************************************************

NOTES: 
	
There were two additional stated hypotheses which we did not test. Reasons below.

Stated-Hyp 6: The negative effects of the cultural dimension of work-family policies may be offset by the increasing material support of the policy.

Rationale: the test hypotheses would be the same as for stated hypotheses 4 - only reverse-coded.

Stated-Hyp 7: The aforementioned effects will be mediated by perceived “ideal worker” and gender norm violations – operationalized as how workers think others will perceive their competence and commitment, as well as their masculinity and femininity, if they were to utilize a given work-family policy.
	
Rationale: testing two mediators for each of the test hypotheses above would generate a large number of test hypotheses. Furthermore, it is unclear whether mediation analyses should only be conducted for significant main effects or also for non-significant main effects. Finally - for moderation effects - it is unclear which link in the mediation model would be moderated.
*/

clear all
use "TESS215_Pedulla_Client.dta"

********************************************************************************

* RECODING

* Gender
	tab PPGENDER, mis
	tab PPGENDER, mis nolab

* Material Condition
	cap drop materialCondition_S1
	tab DOV_TESS215P, mis
	tab DOV_TESS215P, mis nolabel
	gen materialCondition_S1 = 0
	replace materialCondition_S1 = 0 if DOV_TESS215P == 1 | DOV_TESS215P == 4 | DOV_TESS215P == 7 | DOV_TESS215P == 10 | DOV_TESS215P == 13
	replace materialCondition_S1 = 1 if DOV_TESS215P == 2 | DOV_TESS215P == 5 | DOV_TESS215P == 8 | DOV_TESS215P == 11 | DOV_TESS215P == 14
	replace materialCondition_S1 = 2 if DOV_TESS215P == 3 | DOV_TESS215P == 6 | DOV_TESS215P == 9 | DOV_TESS215P == 12 | DOV_TESS215P == 15
	label define materialCondition_S1_l 0 "Unpaid" 1 "Half" 2 "Full" 
	label values materialCondition_S1 materialCondition_S1_l  	
	tab DOV_TESS215P materialCondition_S1, mis
	
	cap drop materialCondition_S2
	tab DOV_TESS215F, mis
	tab DOV_TESS215F, mis nolabel
	gen materialCondition_S2 = 0
	replace materialCondition_S2 = 0 if DOV_TESS215F == 1 | DOV_TESS215F == 3 | DOV_TESS215F == 5 | DOV_TESS215F == 7 | DOV_TESS215F == 9
	replace materialCondition_S2 = 1 if DOV_TESS215F == 2 | DOV_TESS215F == 4 | DOV_TESS215F == 6 | DOV_TESS215F == 8 | DOV_TESS215F == 10
	label define materialCondition_S2_l 0 "Reduced" 1 "Flexible" 
	label values materialCondition_S2 materialCondition_S2_l  	
	tab DOV_TESS215F materialCondition_S2, mis

* Cultural Condition
	cap drop culturalCondition_S1
	tab DOV_TESS215P, mis
	tab DOV_TESS215P, mis nolabel
	gen culturalCondition_S1 = .
	replace culturalCondition_S1 = 0 if DOV_TESS215P == 5 | DOV_TESS215P == 10 | DOV_TESS215P == 15
	replace culturalCondition_S1 = 1 if DOV_TESS215P == 1 | DOV_TESS215P == 6 | DOV_TESS215P == 11
	replace culturalCondition_S1 = 2 if DOV_TESS215P == 2 | DOV_TESS215P == 7 | DOV_TESS215P == 12
	replace culturalCondition_S1 = 3 if DOV_TESS215P == 3 | DOV_TESS215P == 8 | DOV_TESS215P == 13
	replace culturalCondition_S1 = 4 if DOV_TESS215P == 4 | DOV_TESS215P == 9 | DOV_TESS215P == 14
	label define culturalCondition_S1_l 0 "Control" 1 "Common" 2 "Uncommon" 3 "Promotion unlikely" 4 "Promotion unaffected" 
	label values culturalCondition_S1 culturalCondition_S1_l  	
	tab DOV_TESS215P culturalCondition_S1, mis
	
	cap drop culturalCondition_S2
	tab DOV_TESS215F, mis
	tab DOV_TESS215F, mis nolabel
	gen culturalCondition_S2 = .
	replace culturalCondition_S2 = 0 if DOV_TESS215F == 5 | DOV_TESS215F == 10
	replace culturalCondition_S2 = 1 if DOV_TESS215F == 1 | DOV_TESS215F == 6
	replace culturalCondition_S2 = 2 if DOV_TESS215F == 2 | DOV_TESS215F == 7
	replace culturalCondition_S2 = 3 if DOV_TESS215F == 3 | DOV_TESS215F == 8
	replace culturalCondition_S2 = 4 if DOV_TESS215F == 4 | DOV_TESS215F == 9
	label define culturalCondition_S2_l 0 "Control" 1 "Common" 2 "Uncommon" 3 "Promotion unlikely" 4 "Promotion unaffected" 
	label values culturalCondition_S2 culturalCondition_S2_l  	
	tab DOV_TESS215F culturalCondition_S2, mis
	
* DV: Utilize policy
	tab Q1, mis
	tab Q1, mis nolabel
	gen utiPol_S1 = Q1
	replace utiPol_S1 = . if Q1 == -1
	tab utiPol_S1, mis

	tab Q4, mis
	tab Q4, mis nolabel
	gen utiPol_S2 = Q4
	replace utiPol_S2 = . if Q4 == -1
	tab utiPol_S2, mis

********************************************************************************

* ANALYSIS

* Test-Hyp 1: Women, on average, will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.PPGENDER
	// support for H1 (p = .000)
	tess 2.PPGENDER +, init(Pedulla821) bonf(2)
	
	
* Test-Hyp 2: Women, on average, will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men.
	reg utiPol_S2 i.PPGENDER
	// support for H2 (p = .009)
	tess 2.PPGENDER +, bonf(2)	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 3: Men in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the half paid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 1 & (materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H3 (p = .000)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1 +

	
* Test-Hyp 4: Women in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the half paid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 2 & (materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H4 (p = .002)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 5: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib1.materialCondition_S1 if (materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// no support for H5 (p = .272)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 6: Men in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the unpaid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 1 & (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H6 (p = .000)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 7: Women in the full paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the unpaid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 2 & (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H7 (p = .000)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 8: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1 if (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H8 (p = .006)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 9: Men in the half paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the unpaid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 1 & (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1)
	// support for H9 (p = .000)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 10: Women in the half paid leave condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the unpaid leave condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 i.materialCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 2 & (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1)
	// no support for H10 (p = .083)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 11: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1 if (materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1)
	// no support for H11 (p = .105)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 12: Men in the flexible work condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the reduced work condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 i.materialCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 1
	// support for H12 (p = .000)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S2 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 13: Women in the flexible work condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the reduced work condition.	
	reg utiPol_S2 i.materialCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 2
	// support for H13 (p = .000)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S2 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 14: The effect of the flexible work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.PPGENDER##i.materialCondition_S2
	// no support for H14 (p = .434)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S2 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 15: Men in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 1 & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2)
	// support for H15 (p = .050)
	tess 1.culturalCondition_S1 +		
	
* Test-Hyp 16: Women in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 2 & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2)
	// no support for H16 (p = .084)
	tess 1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 17: The effect of the common usage (vs uncommon usage) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2)
	// no support for H17 (p = .775)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 18: Men in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than men in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 1 & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4)
	// support for H18 (p = .000)
	tess 4.culturalCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 19: Women in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the parental leave program than women in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if PPGENDER == 2 & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4)
	// support for H19 (p = .000)
	tess 4.culturalCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 20: The effect of the promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4)
	// no support for H20 (p = .742)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#4.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 21: Men in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.culturalCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 1 & (culturalCondition_S2 == 1 | culturalCondition_S2 == 2)
	// support for H21 (p = .002)
	tess 1.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 22: Women in the common usage condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.culturalCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 2 & (culturalCondition_S2 == 1 | culturalCondition_S2 == 2)
	// support for H22 (p = .005)
	tess 1.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
* Test-Hyp 23: The effect of the common usage (vs uncommon usage) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.PPGENDER##ib2.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 1 | culturalCondition_S2 == 2)
	// no support for H23 (p = .878)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.culturalCondition_S2 +
	
* Test-Hyp 24: Men in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than men in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib3.culturalCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 1 & (culturalCondition_S2 == 3 | culturalCondition_S2 == 4)
	// support for H24 (p = .000)
	tess 4.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
* Test-Hyp 25: Women in the promotion unaffected condition will be more likely to use the flexible work arrangement than women in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib3.culturalCondition_S2 if PPGENDER == 2 & (culturalCondition_S2 == 3 | culturalCondition_S2 == 4)
	// support for H25 (p = .000)
	tess 4.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
* Test-Hyp 26: The effect of the promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men than for women.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.PPGENDER##ib3.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 3 | culturalCondition_S2 == 4)
	// no support for H26 (p = .732)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#4.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
* Test-Hyp 27: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib1.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// no support for H27 (p = .305)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 28: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// no support for H28 (p = .652)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 29: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// no support for H29 (p = .627)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 30: The effect of the full paid leave (vs half paid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib1.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H30 (p = .287)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 31: The effect of the full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H31 (p = .401)
	tess 2.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 32: The effect of the half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) condition on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S1 ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H32 (p = .841)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 33: The effect of the flexibe work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger in the common usage condition than in the uncommon usage condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib0.materialCondition_S2##ib2.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 1 | culturalCondition_S2 == 2)
	// no support for H33 (p = .869)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S2#1.culturalCondition_S2 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 34: The effect of the flexibe work (vs reduced work) condition on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger in the promotion unaffected condition than in the promotion unlikely condition.
	reg utiPol_S2 ib0.materialCondition_S2##ib3.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 3 | culturalCondition_S2 == 4)
	// support for H34 (p = .000)
	tess 1.materialCondition_S2#4.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 35: The full paid leave (vs half paid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib1.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// no support for H35 (p = .173)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 36: The full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// support for H36 (p = .034)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 37: The half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib2.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 1 | culturalCondition_S1 == 2))
	// support for H37 (p = .002)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S1#1.culturalCondition_S1 +
	
	
* Test-Hyp 38: The full paid leave (vs half paid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib1.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 1 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H38 (p = .250)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 39: The full paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 2) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H39 (p = .082)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#2.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 40: The half paid leave (vs unpaid leave) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the parental leave program will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S1 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S1##ib3.culturalCondition_S1 if ((materialCondition_S1 == 0 | materialCondition_S1 == 1) & (culturalCondition_S1 == 3 | culturalCondition_S1 == 4))
	// no support for H40 (p = .539)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S1#4.culturalCondition_S1 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 41: The flexibe work (vs reduced work) material condition x common usage (vs uncommon usage) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S2##ib2.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 1 | culturalCondition_S2 == 2)
	// no support for H41 (p = .224)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S2#1.culturalCondition_S2 +	
	
	
* Test-Hyp 42: The flexibe work (vs reduced work) material condition x promotion unaffected (vs promotion unlikely) cultural condition interaction effect on likelihood to use the flexible work arrangement will be stronger for men (vs women).
	reg utiPol_S2 ib2.PPGENDER##ib0.materialCondition_S2##ib3.culturalCondition_S2 if (culturalCondition_S2 == 3 | culturalCondition_S2 == 4)
	// no support for H42 (p = .791)
	tess 1.PPGENDER#1.materialCondition_S2#4.culturalCondition_S2 +		
